Re the ‘Council on Women’, here’s more info (as of January) as to its apparent gender ratio.
Men: 15
Women: 7 (including Jarrett and Tchen)
See http://thenewagenda.net/obama-cabinet-watch/ as to Obama’s cabinet members and ‘cabinet level posts.’ His ‘Council on Women’ is defined as automatically including all those office holders. (Sorry I lack the stomach to read the Executive Order to see if it includes anyone else.)
A male dominated placebo wrapped in a fig leaf, I calls it.
I’m sure that Obama will instruct Jarrett to do some good things for some key supporters — if it does not in any way inconvenience his money backers, and if he cannot try to win votes from the GOP by using it as a bargaining chip instead, as he omitted the family planning money from the Stimulus
He will also instruct her to do some things that look and sound good but in fact hamper the sort of women who voted against him. And some things that look good but don’t cost him anything, or that function as a panacea, causing some women to slack off because they think some issue is now settled.
Jarrett’s help would likely go to where it would get the most bang for its buck for 2012. That’s not likely to be serious money for people who already give their milk for free. It would be token money aimed to impress white guilt liberals who might otherwise start voting their own economic interests or their common sense. Or money to ACORN and other organizations that directly worked for Obama. Etc.
Any judgment of whether the ‘Council fails’ or is ’successful’ will be filtered through his smoke machine and Big Media. He will make Jarrett look good and she will make him look good. That’s her real job. If he had wanted someone who would really work for women, or even take a balanced position — he would have chosen someone familiar with the field and NOT a trusted crony.
I've posted this elsewhere as
‘Council on Women’ a male-dominated sock puppet with a rubber stamp.
For more evidence that Obama fears women's power, look at how he rammed this package-deal ‘Council’ through, and how it is configured.
There’s an article (I’ll look for the cite) quoting Alinsky’s son as complimenting Obama on setting up the Democratic Convention in August as an ‘organized’ event — meaning that there was no opportunity, ever, for other views to be heard. The establishment of this ‘Council’ has a similar pattern (though spread out longer).
This ‘Council’ was set up with o chance ever for public input on its configuration or its leadership. Membership and leaders names were all in the Executive Order that established the ‘Council.’ The first that most of us heard of it was as a fait accompli with a big media event. (It was also set up such that those leaders did not have to go through Senate Confirmation Hearings.)
Now look at who are already, package deal, defined as members. Obama’s own Cabinet Secretaries ( c. 75% males) plus some department heads (dunno that parity). I’m waiting for some good number cruncher (where are Anglachel and Riverdaughter when we need them?) to research this and compute a head count.
Look at the firewalls Obama has built in here, against this ‘Council’ ever coming out with any recommendation or statement that could embarrass or incovenience him, or hamper his re-election.
Supervised by two trusted cronies who helped him defeat Hillary and Palin. If by any chance they let something come up for a vote, the voters will be his own Cabinet appointees who owe their high paying day jobs to him.
Even if Jarrett and Tchen were to suddenly reveal feminist T-shirts, the 75% male members are there to vote it down.
Imo our best strategy would be to come out now, while the issue is current, strong and loud against this travesty. Use the current pro-Council publicity to get ourselves establishsed as the ‘go to’ opposition voice. Then we might have a little pressure as time goes on, to push the ‘Council’ to actually throw us a few crumbs instead of rubber stamping whatever Obama wants.
Who can draw a cartoon of a sock puppet with a rubber stamp?
